February 17, 2025
The Superpower Has Left the Building: Munich 2025
This article was originally published in War on the Rocks.
National security’s Burning Man took place this weekend, as foreign policy types from around the world gathered once again in Bavaria. The Munich Security Conference years ago burst the confines of the Bayerischer Hof hotel, where a medium-sized group of officials and experts once met to talk trans-Atlantic relations. Now it’s a sprawling and frenetic affair, replete with heads of state, bilateral meetings, side events, press conferences, and off-schedule meals. Old touches remain: the Tiki bar, the schnitzel, the smoking section. And while it sometimes feels more cirque than soleil, there is still illumination to be had in Munich.
The new Trump team showed up in force this year: Vice President J.D. Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, and CIA Director John Ratcliffe were all there, as was Chairman of the Joint Chiefs C.Q. Brown and a bipartisan delegation from Congress. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz spoke, as did Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, and a slew of others from multiple continents. And so, the discussions revealed how leaders and thinkers are dealing with the world today.
Behind the frustration and fears of abandonment lies a major question: What will — what can — Europe do about it?
Four themes struck me as emblematic of this year’s Munich zeitgeist.
Trump Acts, Europe Reacts
President Trump set the scene ahead of the conference, stunning Europeans by calling Vladimir Putin and announcing the immediate start of negotiations to end the war in Ukraine. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth in Brussels then suggested that Ukraine would not recover its lost territories, that U.S. troops would not deploy to Ukraine after a ceasefire, and that Ukraine would not become a NATO member. While few European officials quibbled with the truth of Hegseth’s remarks, they almost unanimously declared them a tactical mistake. Such concessions should be discussed at the negotiating table, most thought, and it is unwise to give away potential bargaining chips.
Read the full article on War on the Rocks.
More from CNAS
-
NATO's Biggest Threats
Podcast
In the wake of a very short communiqué and an abbreviated Summit, many questions have been left unanswered by allies. How NATO would manage a reduction of military assets in E...
By Andrea Kendall-Taylor & Jim Townsend
-
How Russia Could Exploit a Vacuum in Europe
Commentary
Putin would assume that with a smaller U.S. presence in Europe, the West would be forced to favor de-escalation, creating an environment the Kremlin would view as exceptionall...
By Andrea Kendall-Taylor, Jim Townsend & Kate Johnston
-
Global Swing States and the New Great Power Competition
Commentary
The United States should prioritize these six countries in their foreign policy, encouraging swing state governments to choose policies that reflect the core principles of int...
By Richard Fontaine & Gibbs McKinley
-
What a Stronger Europe Means for America
Podcast
A more capable Europe will also mean a more independent Europe, more willing to defy U.S. priorities and make demands for cooperation. Wallander has been a key player in the t...
By Celeste Wallander
